In the cosmetology industry it is current practice when a person is receiving a hair permanent or having their hair dyed that prior to caustic solutions being applied to the hair, a length of cotton batting is wrapped around the hairline. This is to absorb excess caustic solution and thereby avoid solution running into the eyes or onto the face and neck of the person having their hair penned or dyed. This method unfortunately has several disadvantages. In particular, the cotton batting is non-reusable and thus the supply of cotton batting constantly has to be replaced. Further, once wetted, cotton batting is difficult to manipulate in that it readily disintegrates and does not retain moisture well so that if the wetted cotton batting is handled in order to, for example, reposition the cotton batting, quite often the solution absorbed in the cotton batting will be released. U.S. Pat. No. 5,133,371 which issued on Jul. 28, 1992 to Sivess for an Absorbent Beauty Coil provides a tubular cloth cover over cotton batting, the combination supplied as a roll from which lengths are cut for one-time use and disposal. The coil is wrapped around the hairline, over the ears of the user so as to keep the wrap in contact with the hair. This is disadvantageous as it interferes with the curlers and with treatment of the hair itself. Further, it may not, in applicant's view, be sufficiently tightenable around the head to hold the liquid and prevent dripping.
Applicant is also aware of prior art headband assemblies of the type such as that proposed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,388,708 which issued Jun. 18, 1968 to Hudson, in which a supporting gutter-like structure is provided to retain cotton batting around the hairline of the user. Another gutter-like structure for collecting excess hair solutions is proposed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,368,545, which issued on Jan. 18, 1983 to Seidman for a Face-Protecting Device. Seidman proposes to catch excess hair solution in a flexible gutter so that the solution may be drained off and discarded.
Applicant is aware of various other proposed means for absorbing excess hair solution such as taught by U.S. Pat. No. 3,050,071 which issued on Aug. 21, 1962 to Hall for a Hair Solution Absorber, U.S. Pat. No. 4,958,385 which issued on Sep. 25, 1990 to Rushton for a Hair Dressing Headband, and laid open Canadian Patent Application No. 2,108,345 filed by Nicholson on Oct. 13, 1993 for an Absorbent Head Wrap. These devices all seek to improve on the performance of the usual method of using cotton batting as described above, without the advantages of the present invention as hereinafter disclosed.
Applicant is also aware of U.S. Pat. No. 4,656,671, which issued Apr. 14, 1987 to Manges, for a Reusable Headband. Manges discloses a reusable headband for protecting the wearer from eye injury when using hair permanent solution. The headband is comprised of a strip of terry cloth which has been folded over a short central strip of elastic and sewed to the elastic strip while the elastic strip is stretched so that upon relaxation of the elastic strip an accordion pleat is formed longitudinally along the central portion of the headband. The ends of the band are provided with Velcro.TM. hook and loop fasteners. A drawback of the Manges headband is the relative complexity of manufacture and that the elastic strip sewn into the Manges headband may have little resistance to caustic hair permanent solutions and hair dyes which may considerably shorten the effective life span of the headband. Further, because the Manges headband relies on the resiliency of an elastic strip to tighten the headband on the head of a user, it may be that if the user has a small head that the resiliency of the elastic strip may be insufficient to form a proper seal around the hairline, or that the pleating of the material may wrinkle to such an extent that a proper seal around the hairline is not formed.